Skip to content

DOC Remove extra documentation of t_ for MLPRegressor #19805

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

rynoV
Copy link

@rynoV rynoV commented Apr 1, 2021

Reference Issues/PRs

Addresses #19804

What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.

The t_ attribute was documented twice in MLPRegressor. This removes the second documentation instance (based on the MLPClassifier documentation and experimentation showing that the attribute doesn't contain what that documentation said it does).

Copy link
Member

@thomasjpfan thomasjpfan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the PR @rynoV !

@@ -1320,10 +1320,6 @@ class MLPRegressor(RegressorMixin, BaseMultilayerPerceptron):
loss_curve_ : list of shape (n_iters,)
Loss value evaluated at the end of each training step.

t_ : int
Mathematically equals `n_iters * X.shape[0]`, it means
`time_step` and it is used by optimizer's learning rate scheduler.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think n_iters * X.shapes[0] part is useful information. Can we update the t_ : above to include this information:

t_ : int
    The number of training samples seen by the solver during fitting.
    Same as `n_iter_ * n_samples`. 

@thomasjpfan thomasjpfan changed the title Remove extra documentation of t_ for MLPRegressor DOC Remove extra documentation of t_ for MLPRegressor Apr 1, 2021
@glemaitre glemaitre mentioned this pull request Apr 19, 2021
@glemaitre glemaitre assigned glemaitre and unassigned glemaitre Apr 19, 2021
@glemaitre glemaitre self-requested a review April 19, 2021 08:50
@glemaitre
Copy link
Member

OK I got confused. #19595 solve the issue and was already merged. Sorry for the noise. Closing.

@glemaitre glemaitre closed this Apr 19, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants